`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________________
`
`MAJOR DATA UAB,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`BRIGHT DATA LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________________
`
`Case No. IPR2022-00916
`Patent No. 10,484,510
`____________________
`
`MAJOR DATA UAB
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. §42
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1
`2. STATUTORY PREDICATES ........................................................................... 2
`2.1. Mandatory Notices (37 CFR § 42.8) ......................................................... 2
`2.1.1. Real Parties-In-Interest .......................................................................... 2
`2.1.2. Related Matters ...................................................................................... 3
`2.1.3. Lead and Backup Counsel ..................................................................... 9
`2.1.4. Service Information ............................................................................. 10
`2.2. Other ........................................................................................................ 10
`3. DISCRETIONARY CONSIDERATIONS (35 U.S.C. § 314(a)) .................... 11
`4. OVERVIEW OF THE ’510 PATENT ............................................................. 12
`4.1. Claims ..................................................................................................... 12
`4.2. Specification ............................................................................................ 13
`4.3. Priority Date ............................................................................................ 15
`5. LEVEL OF SKILL IN THE ART .................................................................... 16
`6. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................. 16
`7. OVERVIEW OF CITED ART ......................................................................... 22
`7.1. Crowds .................................................................................................... 22
`7.2. MorphMix ............................................................................................... 22
`7.3. Border ...................................................................................................... 23
`7.4. RFCs ........................................................................................................ 23
`8. GROUNDS FOR INVALIDITY ..................................................................... 24
`
`i
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`8.1. GROUND 1: ANTICIPATION OF CLAIMS 6, 7, 13, 15, 16, AND
`18-24 BY CROWDS ............................................................................... 24
`8.1.1. Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 25
`8.1.2. Claim 6 (working with second web server) ........................................ 31
`8.1.3. Claims 7 and 21 (running a browser) .................................................. 32
`8.1.4. Claims 13 and 24 (corresponding recorded media) ............................ 33
`8.1.5. Claim 15 (receiving the FCI over the TCP connection) ..................... 33
`8.1.6. Claim 16 (FCI comprises HTTP request) ........................................... 34
`8.1.7. Claims 18-19 (communicating via TCP) ............................................ 34
`8.1.8. Claim 20 (web page) ........................................................................... 34
`8.1.9. Claim 22 (client O/S) .......................................................................... 35
`8.1.10. Claim 23 (sequential execution) ........................................................ 35
`8.2. GROUND 2: OBVIOUSNESS OF CLAIMS 1-2, 6-11, 13, 15-16,
`AND 18-24 OVER CROWDS + RFC 2616 + GENERAL
`KNOWLEDGE ....................................................................................... 36
`8.2.1. Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 37
`8.2.2. Claim 2 (client device identifies itself on startup) .............................. 38
`8.2.3. Claims 8-9 (periodically communicating) ........................................... 39
`8.2.4. Claims 10-11 (validity check) ............................................................. 41
`8.2.5. Claims 6, 7, 13, 15, 16, and 18-24 ...................................................... 42
`8.3. GROUND 3: ANTICIPATION OF CLAIMS 1, 6, 10, 15-20, 23,
`AND 24 BY BORDER ........................................................................... 42
`8.3.1. Claim 1 Preamble ................................................................................ 45
`8.3.2. Claim 6 (working with second web server) ........................................ 50
`8.3.3. Claim 10 (validity check) .................................................................... 50
`
`ii
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`8.3.4. Claim 15 (receiving the FCI over the TCP connection) ..................... 51
`8.3.5. Claim 16 (FCI comprises HTTP request) ........................................... 52
`8.3.6. Claim 17 (storing the first content) ..................................................... 53
`8.3.7. Claims 18 and 19 (communicating via TCP) ...................................... 53
`8.3.8. Claim 20 (web page) ........................................................................... 53
`8.3.9. Claim 23 (sequential execution) .......................................................... 53
`8.3.10. Claim 24 (corresponding recorded media) ........................................ 54
`8.4. GROUND 4: OBVIOUSNESS OF CLAIMS 1, 6, 8-11, 13, 15-20,
`AND 22-24 OVER BORDER + RFC 2616 + GENERAL
`KNOWLEDGE ....................................................................................... 55
`8.4.1. Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 56
`8.4.2. Claims 8 and 9 (periodically communicating) .................................... 56
`8.4.3. Claim 11 (validity check, RFC 2616) ................................................. 58
`8.4.4. Claim 13 (downloading recorded application) .................................... 59
`8.4.5. Claim 22 (client O/S) .......................................................................... 59
`8.4.6. Claims 6, 10, 15-20, and 23-24 ........................................................... 60
`8.5. GROUND 5: ANTICIPATION OF CLAIMS 1, 6-8, 13, 15-16,
`AND 18-24 BY MORPHMIX ................................................................ 60
`8.5.1. Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 62
`8.5.2. Claim 6 (working with second web server) ........................................ 67
`8.5.3. Claims 7 and 21 (running a browser) .................................................. 68
`8.5.4. Claim 8 (periodically communicating via TCP) ................................. 69
`8.5.5. Claims 13 and 24 (corresponding recorded media) ............................ 70
`8.5.6. Claim 15 (receiving the FCI over the TCP connection) ..................... 71
`
`iii
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`8.5.7. Claim 16 (FCI comprises HTTP request) ........................................... 72
`8.5.8. Claims 18-19 (communicating via TCP) ............................................ 72
`8.5.9. Claim 20 (web page) ........................................................................... 72
`8.5.10. Claim 22 (client O/S) ......................................................................... 73
`8.5.11. Claim 23 (sequential execution) ........................................................ 73
`8.6. GROUND 6: OBVIOUSNESS OF CLAIMS 1-2, 6-11, 13, 15- 16,
`AND 18-24 OVER MORPHMIX + RFC 2616 + GENERAL
`KNOWLEDGE ....................................................................................... 73
`8.6.1. Claim 1 ................................................................................................ 74
`8.6.2. Claim 2 (client device identifies itself at startup) ............................... 75
`8.6.3. Claim 9 (keep-alive messages) ............................................................ 76
`8.6.4. Claims 10-11 (validity check) ............................................................. 77
`8.6.5. Claims 6-8, 13, 15-16, and 18-23 ........................................................ 78
`
`iv
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`EXHIBITS LIST
`1001 United States Patent No. 10,484,510 to Shribman et al.
`1002 File History for United States Patent No. 10,484,510
`1003 Petitioners’ Chart of Challenged Claims
`1004 Luminati’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Luminati
`Networks Ltd. v. Teso LT, UAB et al., 2:19-cv-00395- JRG (E.D. Tex.)
`1005 Declaration of Keith J. Teruya with curriculum vitae
`1006 Reiter, M. et al., Crowds: Anonymity for Web Transactions, ACM
`Transactions on Information and System Security, Vol. 1, No. 1, Nov.
`1998, at 66-92
`1007 Declaration of Scott Delman (regarding Crowds)
`1008 Rennhard, M., MorphMix – A Peer-to-Peer-based System for
`Anonymous Internet Access (2004) (Doctoral Thesis)
`1009 Declaration of Marc Rennhard (regarding MorphMix)
`1010 Declaration of Bernhard Plattner (regarding MorphMix)
`1011 Declaration of Andreas Berz (regarding MorphMix)
`1012 United States Patent No. 6,795,848 to Border et al.
`1013 Fielding, R. et al., “Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.1”, RFC
`2616, June 1999
`1014 Socolofsky, T. et al., “TCP/IP Tutorial”, RFC 1180, January 1991
`1015 Postel, J., “Internet Protocol”, STD 5, RFC 791, September 1981
`1016 Braden, R., Ed., “Requirements for Internet Hosts – Communication
`Layers”, STD 3, RFC 1122, October 1989
`1017 Claim Construction Opinion and Order, Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso
`LT, UAB et al., 2:19-cv-00395-JRG (E.D. Tex.)
`1018 W3C, Glossary of Terms for Device Independence, January 2005
`1019 U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0037977 to Gai et al.
`1020 Supplemental Claim Construction Order, Luminati Networks Ltd. v.
`Teso LT, UAB et al., 2:19-cv-00395-JRG (E.D. Tex.)
`1021 Transcript of Pretrial Conference, Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso
`LT, UAB et al., 2:19-cv-00395-JRG (E.D. Tex.)
`1022 Comparison of Claim 1 in ’319 and ’510 Patents
`1023 Fielding, R., et al., Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.1, RFC 2068,
`January 1997
`1024 Declaration of Wensheng Ma (regarding exhibits submitted herein)
`
`v
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`1.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Petitioner Major Data UAB (“Petitioner” or “Major Data”) seeks inter
`
`partes review and cancellation of claims 1, 2, 6-11, 13, and 15-24 (“Challenged
`
`Claims”) of U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510. Ex. 1001 (the “’510 patent” or the
`
`“Patent”). The Petition is supported by the Exhibits listed above, including the
`
`Expert Declaration of Keith J. Teruya (Ex. 1005).
`
`The ’510 patent is a continuation of U.S. Patent No. 10,257,319 (the “’319
`
`patent”), challenged separately herewith. As is apparent from a comparison (Ex.
`
`1022), the principal (and only material) difference between the independent claims
`
`of the two patents is that claim 1 of the ’510 patent adds that the middleman, proxy
`
`device (first client device) establishes, and forwards the requested content over, a
`
`TCP connection with the content-requesting device (second server):
`
`second server <-TCP-> client (proxy) device <—> web server
`
`For reasons discussed in the accompanying petition on the ’319 patent (and
`
`also included herein to make a sufficient free-standing record as to the ’510 patent)
`
`the ’510 patent, like the ’319 patent, is anticipated and/or obvious over Crowds
`
`(Ex. 1006), Border (Ex. 1012), and MorphMix (Ex. 1008). The ’510 patent
`
`inventors were also far from inventing persistent TCP connections, and as
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`addressed herein, the same three principal references anticipate and/or render
`
`obvious the combination, including persistent TCP connections as well.1
`
`This Petition is being submitted concurrently with a motion for joinder.
`
`Specifically, Petitioner requests institution and joinder with NetNut Ltd. v. Bright
`
`Data Ltd., IPR2021-01493 (“the NetNut IPR”), which the Board instituted on
`
`March 21, 2022. This Petition is substantially identical to the petition in the NetNut
`
`IPR and contains the same grounds (based on the same prior art and supporting
`
`evidence) against the same claims, and differs only as necessary to reflect the fact
`
`that it is filed by a different petitioner.
`
`2.
`
`STATUTORY PREDICATES
`
`2.1. Mandatory Notices (37 CFR § 42.8)
`
`2.1.1. Real Parties-In-Interest
`
`The real party-in-interest is Petitioner Major Data UAB. (“Petitioner” or
`
`“Major Data”).
`
`
`1 There is also very little difference between claim 1 of the ’510 patent and claim
`
`24 of the ’319 patent (which likewise recites establishing a TCP connection).
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`2.1.2. Related Matters
`
`Judicial
`
`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`Matter
`Bright Data Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd., No. 2:21-cv-
`00225 (E.D. Tx.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Tefincom SA d/b/a
`NordVPN, No. 2-19-cv-00414 (E.D. Tx.)
`
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso LT, UAB a/k/a
`UAB Teso LT et al., No. 2-19-cv-00395 (E.D.
`Tx.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. BI Science (2009)
`Ltd., No. 2-19-cv-00397 (E.D. Tx.)
`
`Luminati Networks Ltd. f/k/a Hola Networks
`Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd., No. 2:20-cv-00188 (E.D.
`Tx.)
`Bright Data Ltd. v. code200, UAB et al., No.
`2-19-cv-00396 (E.D. Tx.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. BI Science (2009)
`Ltd. a/k/a BIScience Inc., No. 2-19-cv-00352
`(E.D. Tx.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. IP Ninja Ltd., No.
`2-19-cv-00196 (E.D. Tx.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. BIScience Ltd. a/k/a
`BIScience Inc., No. 2-18-cv-00483 (E.D. Tx.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. UAB Tesonet, No.
`2-18-cv-00299 (E.D. Tx.)
`
`Subject Matter
`Patent Nos. 10,257,319;
`10,484,510
`Patent Nos. 10,257,319;
`10,469,614; 10,484,510;
`10,484,511; 10,637,968
`
`Patent Nos. 10,257,319;
`10,469,614; 10,484,510
`
`Patent Nos. 10,257,319;
`10,469,614; 10,484,510;
`10,484,511
`Patent Nos. 10,484,511;
`10,637,968
`
`Patent Nos. 10,484,511;
`10,637,968
`Patent No. 10,410,244
`
`Patent Nos. 9,241,044;
`9,742,866
`Patent Nos. 9,241,044;
`9,742,866
`Patent Nos. 9,241,044;
`9,742,866
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. UAB Tesonet, No.
`2-18-cv-00299 (E.D. Tx.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. BI Science (2009)
`Ltd., No. 21-1664 (Fed. Cir.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. BI Science (2009)
`Ltd., No. 21-1667 (Fed. Cir.)
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. BI Science Inc., No.
`20-2181 (Fed. Cir.)
`Bright Data Ltd. v. BI Science (2009) Ltd., No.
`20-2118 (Fed. Cir.)
`Bright Data Ltd. v. Ninja-Tech, SIA, No. 2:21-
`cv-434 (E.D. Tx.)
`
`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`Patent Nos. 9,241,044;
`9,742,866
`Appeal
`
`Appeal
`
`Appeal
`
`Appeal
`
`Patent Nos. 10,257,319;
`10,484,510
`
`
`Administrative—PTAB
`
`Matter
`Code200, UAB et al v. Luminati Networks Ltd.
`f/k/a Hola Networks Ltd., IPR2020-01266
`(Petition denied)
`NetNut Ltd. v. Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati
`Networks Ltd., IPR2021-00465 (Petition
`instituted)
`NetNut Ltd. v. Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati
`Networks Ltd., IPR2021-00458 (Petition
`instituted)
`Code200, UAB et al v. Luminati Networks Ltd.
`f/k/a Hola Networks Ltd., IPR2020-01358
`(Petition denied)
`
`Subject Matter
`Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Patent No. 9,742,866
`
`Patent No. 9,241,044
`
`Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Code200, UAB et al v. Luminati Networks Ltd.
`f/k/a Hola Networks Ltd., IPR2020-01506
`(Petition denied)
`Code200, UAB et al v. Luminati Networks Ltd.
`f/k/a Hola Networks Ltd., IPR2021-00249
`(Petition denied)
`BI Science (2009) Ltd. a/k/a BIScience Inc.
`v. Luminati Networks Ltd., IPR2020-00166
`(Terminated prior to institution decision)
`BI Science (2009) Ltd. a/k/a BIScience Inc.
`v. Luminati Networks Ltd., IPR2020-00167
`(Terminated prior to institution decision)
`Teso LT, UAB f/k/a UAB Tesonet et al v.
`Luminati Networks Ltd. f/k/a Hola Networks
`Ltd., IPR2021-00122 (Petition denied)
`NetNut Ltd. v. Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati
`Networks Ltd., IPR2021-01492 (Petition
`instituted)
`NetNut Ltd. v. Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati
`Networks Ltd., IPR2021-01493 (Petition
`instituted)
`The Data Company Technologies Inc. v. Bright
`Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd.,
`IPR2022-00135 (Petition pending)
`The Data Company Technologies Inc. v. Bright
`Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd.,
`IPR2022-00138 (Petition pending)
`Code200, UAB et al v. Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a
`Luminati Networks Ltd., IPR2022-00861
`(Petition pending)
`
`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`Patent No. 10,469,614
`
`Patent No. 10,637,968
`
`Patent No. 9,241,044
`
`Patent No. 9,742,866
`
`Patent No. 10,484,511
`
`Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`Code200, UAB et al v. Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a
`Luminati Networks Ltd., IPR2022-00862
`(Petition pending)
`
`
`Administrative—Matters Shown in PAIR
`
`In the following, the “’624 Family” refers to patents claiming priority to
`
`provisional application No. 61/249,624 (the provisional of the ’319 patent, filed
`
`Oct. 8, 2009), while the “’815 Family” refers to patents claiming priority to a later
`
`provisional application, No. 61/870,815 (filed Aug. 28, 2013).
`
`App. No.
`12/836,059
`14/025,109
`14/468,836
`14/930,894
`15/663,762
`15/957,942
`15/957,945
`15/957,950
`16/031,636
`16/140,749
`16/140,785
`16/214,433
`16/214,451
`16/214,476
`16/214,496
`16/278,104
`16/278,105
`
`Status/Issued As
`U.S. Pat. No. 8,560,604
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,069,936
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,241,044
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,742,866
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,277,711
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,313,484
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,257,319
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,225,374
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,616,375
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,652,357
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,659,562
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,469,614
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,440,146
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,652,358
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,721,325
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,523,788
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,469,628
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`Related To
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,491,712
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,484,510
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,484,511
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,469,615
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,447,809
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,582,013
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,582,014
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,637,968
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,637,968
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,044,341
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,190,622
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,050,852
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,044,341
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,044,344
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,089,135
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,038,989
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,986,216
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,044,345
`7
`
`16/278,106
`16/278,107
`16/278,109
`16/292,363
`16/292,382
`16/292,364
`16/292,374
`16/292,382
`16/365,250
`16/365,315
`16/368,002
`16/368,041
`16/396,695
`16/396,696
`16/524,026
`16/566,929
`16/567,496
`16/593,996
`16/593,999
`16/600,504
`16/600,505
`16/600,506
`16/600,507
`16/662,800
`16/662,883
`16/693,306
`16/782,073
`16/782,076
`16/807,661
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’815 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,128,738
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,785,347
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,805,429
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,297,167
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,931,792
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,958,768
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,044,346
`Pending
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,303,734
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,233,879
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,233,880
`8
`
`16/807,691
`16/865,362
`16/865,364
`16/865,366
`16/910,724
`16/910,863
`16/932,763
`16/932,764
`16/932,766
`16/932,767
`17/019,267
`17/019,268
`17/098,392
`17/146,701
`17/146,625
`17/146,649
`17/146,728
`17/194,272
`17/194,273
`17/194,336
`17/194,339
`17/241,111
`17/241,113
`17/241,119
`17/331,980
`17/332,001
`17/332,023
`17/332,077
`17/332,116
`
`
`
`
`

`

`U.S. Pat. No. 11,233,881
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,228,666
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,178,258
`U.S. Pat. No. 11,206,317
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,257,319
`U.S. Pat. No. 10,484,510
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`Pending
`
`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`’624 Family
`
`17/332,171
`17/332,220
`17/332,260
`17/332,290
`90/014,624
`90/014,652
`17/395,526
`90/014,816
`90/014,827
`90/014,875
`90/014,876
`17/518,601
`17/518,603
`90/019,041
`90/014,920
`17/563,497
`17/563,531
`17/563,578
`17/563,616
`90/014,940
`17/714,423
`17/714,455
`17/714,475
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.1.3. Lead and Backup Counsel
`
`Lead Counsel
`
`Liang Huang (Reg. No. 67,016)
`
`Back-up Counsel
`
`Wensheng Ma (Reg. No. 80,420)
`
`9
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`
`
`
`
`2.1.4. Service Information
`
`Electronic Mail
`
`Postal (and hand-
`delivery) mailing address
`
`Telephone
`Facsimile
`
`(1) rhuang@mkwllp.com
`(2) wma@mkwllp.com
`(3) jbartlett@mkwllp.com
`Mauriel Kapouytian Woods LLP
`15 W. 26 Street, 7th Floor
`New York, NY 10010
`415-738-6328
`212-529-5132
`
`Additionally, Petitioner consents to electronic service via e-mail at the e-
`
`mail addresses noted above.
`
`2.2. Other
`
`The USPTO is authorized to charge any required fees, including the fee as
`
`set forth in 37 C.F.R. §42.15(a) and any excess claim fees, to Deposit Account 50-
`
`4242.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.104(a), Petitioner certifies that the ’510 patent is
`
`available for inter partes review and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped from
`
`requesting inter partes review challenging the patent claims on the grounds
`
`identified in this Petition. Petitioner has not been subject to an infringement suit
`
`asserting the ’510 patent.
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`Pursuant to 37 CFR § 42.104(b), Petitioner states that it seeks cancellation of
`
`the claims listed below on the statutory grounds, patents, and printed publications
`
`stated for each:
`
`Challenge
`No. Claims
`Anticipated by Crowds (§ 102)
`1
`1, 6-7, 15-16, and 18-24
`2
`1-2, 6-11, 13, 15-16, and 18-24 Obvious over Crowds + Knowledge
`of POSITA + Request for
`Comments (“RFC”) 2616 (§ 103)
`Anticipated by Border (§ 102)
`1, 6, 10, 15-20, and 23-24
`Obvious over Border + Knowledge
`1, 6, 8-11, 13, 15-20, and 22-
`of POSITA + RFC 2616 (§ 103)
`24
`Anticipated by MorphMix (§ 102)
`1, 6-8, 13, 15-16, and 18-24
`1-2, 6-11, 13, 15-16, and 18-24 Obvious over MorphMix +
`Knowledge of POSITA + RFC
`2616 (§ 103)
`
`3
`4
`
`5
`6
`
`
`3. DISCRETIONARY CONSIDERATIONS (35 U.S.C. § 314(a))
`
`This Petition is being submitted concurrently with a motion for joinder.
`
`Specifically, Petitioner requests institution and joinder with NetNut Ltd. v. Bright
`
`Data Ltd., IPR2021-01493 (“the NetNut IPR”), which the Board instituted on
`
`March 21, 2022. This Petition is substantially identical to the petition in the NetNut
`
`IPR and contains the same grounds (based on the same prior art and supporting
`
`evidence) against the same claims, and differs only as necessary to reflect the fact
`
`that it is filed by a different petitioner. All exhibits filed by Petitioner, including
`
`the expert declaration, are substantially the same exhibits filed in the NetNut IPR.
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`A change to the document control number on the first page of each exhibit was
`
`made to indicate filing with this IPR Petition. An additional certifying declaration
`
`by Petitioner’s counsel, Wensheng Ma (Ex. 1024) is also included.
`
`4. OVERVIEW OF THE ’510 PATENT
`
`4.1. Claims
`
`The Challenged Claims are listed in Ex. 1003.
`
`The following figure schematically represents the data flow corresponding to
`
`claim 1, and the steps performed by the intermediate device in the middle of the
`
`figure:
`
`
`
`
`
`’510 Patent Claim 1 Data Flow
`
`
`
`This is the data flow of a conventional “proxy server”—a device that stands
`
`in the middle to relay requests and responses to and from an ordinary web server.
`
`In the case of the ’510 patent, claim 1 recites “establishing a TCP connection” and
`
`that step (4) in the above figure (returning the first content) is done over that
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`connection. However, as will be addressed, this is also standard, in prior art in
`
`exactly the same context, and hardly merits a patent.
`
`The “client” and “server” labelling of the devices in the claim also do not
`
`distinguish over the prior art.
`
`As will be individually addressed, the dependent Challenged Claims merely
`
`recite additional common steps, for example using headers defined in existing
`
`Internet standards, cached content validation, and the like, commonly found in
`
`proxy devices well known in the art.
`
`4.2. Specification
`
`The ’510 patent uses as an example a peer-to-peer swarm of devices,
`
`provisioned so they can variously act as either “clients” or “servers” (and
`
`sometimes as both), at various times and under various circumstances.
`
`In the disclosure, any of a plurality of “communication devices,” running a
`
`common “acceleration application” 220, can function in different roles, including
`
`as a “client” (device that requests content, for example for the client’s web
`
`browser) “agent” (device that obtains content an origin web server and/or manages
`
`its retrieval from peers), or “peer” (device that continues to cache content received
`
`while the peer acted as a client or agent):
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`
`
`
`Fig. 3 from the ’510 patent
`
`Network 100 shown in Fig. 3 “contains multiple communication devices,”
`
`and “each communication device may serve as a client, peer, or agent. . . .” Ex.
`
`1001, 4:45-53. The figure shows “peer[s],” a “client,” and an “agent”
`
`communicating, with the “agent” forming a connection to a server.
`
`The disclosed system preferentially seeks to satisfy requests for web con-
`
`tent, by way of agents, from peer caches established as a result of prior retrievals.
`
`Id., 13:4-14:61.
`
`However, all requested content still must come from its actual origin. If an
`
`agent determines that the content request cannot be satisfied from peer caches,
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`processing reverts to a model, more pertinent to the claimed embodiments, in
`
`which the agent serves as a retrieval intermediary, as shown in Fig. 3 of the ’510
`
`patent: in this scenario (i.e., no cache hit among the connected peers), the agent
`
`makes a request directly to the web server for the content, and after the web server
`
`sends the data, the agent responds to the requesting client, listing itself as the only
`
`peer with responsive data, and then, acting as that peer, transfers the responsive
`
`data to the requesting client upon the latter’s request (id., 14:62-15:12), thus
`
`implementing at a high level the characteristic proxy server data flow first shown
`
`above. The Patent further discloses an embodiment wherein the client and agent
`
`devices establish TCP connections between them. Id., 17:15-19:4.2
`
`4.3. Priority Date
`
`The ’510 patent claims priority to provisional application 61/249,624 (the
`
`“2009 Provisional”) filed on October 8, 2009 (“Priority Date”). (The claimed
`
`priority pre-dates the March 16, 2013 effective date of the First Inventor to File
`
`provisions of the AIA.)
`
`
`2 Petitioner reserves any arguments based on lack of enablement or written
`
`description, or indefiniteness, which are beyond the scope of this IPR.
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`5.
`
`LEVEL OF SKILL IN THE ART
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) in the field to which the
`
`’510 patent pertains would have at least a bachelor’s degree in Computer Science
`
`or related field (or equivalent experience), and two or more years’ experience
`
`working with and programming networked computer systems as of the Priority
`
`Date. Such a person would be familiar with the underlying principles of Web,
`
`Internet, or network communication, data transfer, and content sharing across
`
`networks, including the HTTP and TCP/IP protocols. Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 25-27. See also
`
`id., ¶¶ 51-54, as to the knowledge a POSITA would possess as of the Priority
`
`Date.3
`
`6. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`Exhibits 1017 and 1020 are an EDTX decision and a supplemental decision
`
`construing terms of the ’510 patent. Petitioner asserts that the court’s constructions
`
`are appropriate:
`
`Agreed constructions adopted by the court :
`
`Term
`preamble
`
`Construction
`limiting
`
`
`3 Petitioner reserves any arguments based on lack of enablement or written
`
`description, or indefiniteness, which are beyond the scope of this IPR.
`
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`web server
`receiving, from the second
`server, the first content
`identifier
`during, as part of, or in
`response to, a start up
`
`plain and ordinary meaning
`plain and ordinary meaning
`
`plain and ordinary meaning
`
`Disputed constructions, as construed by the court:
`
`Term
`client device
`
`first server
`second server
`
`Court’s Construction
`communication device that is operating in
`the role of a client
`plain and ordinary meaning
`server that is not the client device (further
`clarified by supplemental order, see
`below)
`
`
`
`
`
`Supplemental ruling (Ex. 1020 at 8, 10):
`
`Term
`second server
`
`Court’s Clarification
`a device that is operating in the role of a
`server and that is not the first client
`device
`
`As to “client device,” the court cited Patent Owner’s extrinsic evidence, the
`
`W3C Glossary of Terms for Device Independence. See Ex. 1018, 4; Ex. 1017, 12.
`
`In IPRs concerning Patent Owner’s related patents, the Board construed “client
`
`device” in almost these exact terms, as “a device that is operating in the role of a
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00916
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`client by requesting services, functionalities, or resources from other devices.”
`
`IPR2021-00458, Paper 11 at 19 (concerning Patent Owner’s Patent No. 9,241,044).
`
`See also IPR2021-00465, Paper 11 at 14-15 (same, concerning Patent Owner’s
`
`Patent No. 9,742,866).
`
`In its supplemental ruling (Ex. 1020), the court reaffirmed that “a component
`
`can be configured to operate in different roles.” Ex. 1020, 10 (emphasis in
`
`original).
`
`As to “second server,” Patent Owner argued only that it should be distinct
`
`from both the client device and the web server. See Ex. 1017, 13. The court went
`
`with the first of these requirements, but not the second (id.,14), which, for purposes
`
`of this Petition only, Petitioner asserts is reasonable, and in any case makes no
`
`difference as to the art cited herein.4
`
`The court’s supplemental ruling, approving the clarification that the second
`
`server is a device “operating in the role of a server,” follows the definition of
`
`“server” in the W3C Glossary extrinsic evidence source that the court relied on for
`
`
`4 The court also held claim 13 indefinite, as unclear with regar